Steven Tyler’s Accuser Responds to His Attempt to Dismiss Lawsuit Amid Trial

## Legal Battle Over Allegations Against Steven Tyler

The woman pursuing legal action against Steven Tyler, claiming sexual abuse when she was just 16 and he was in his mid-20s, is strongly opposing his recent bid to dismiss her lawsuit. Misley asserts that Tyler “waived” his defense by failing to mention it in his earlier responses to her claims.

### Jurisdiction and Defense Arguments

Misley maintains that Tyler’s defense, which revolves around “choice of law and application,” is not valid. She emphasizes that public policy should not favor someone who purposefully brought a minor to a location with less protection. Her legal team detailed these points in a recent filing ahead of an August 28 hearing concerning a summary judgment motion.

Tyler is also accused of inadequately arguing the statutes of limitations in states other than California. Misley notes that Tyler was aware of allegations from various states when he filed an amended answer in April 2025, yet he did not specify the relevant statute sections for Oregon, Washington, or Massachusetts. Therefore, she argues that he should not be allowed to introduce these defenses at this stage.

### Summary Judgment Motion

In his motion for summary judgment, Tyler, now 77, seeks to have the case dismissed entirely. He argues that Misley, as a non-resident of California, is incorrectly applying the state’s childhood sexual assault revival statute. He characterized the relationship as one of mutual consent, alongside an assertion that any potential claims outside California are no longer valid.

Misley, however, described her experience in her deposition, expressing feelings of humiliation and degradation. She argues that these emotional distress claims are integral to her lawsuit.

### Defense’s Response and Background

Tyler has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, describing his relationship with Misley as consensual and loving. His 2011 memoir, *Does the Noise in My Head Bother You?*, illustrates their relationship, including a guardianship arrangement wherein her parents allegedly gave him custody to avoid legal issues when taking her out of state.

He recounts intimate moments during their time together, including an incident on a flight and a unique experience in a Beverly Hills Hotel elevator. However, according to Misley’s latest filing, Tyler’s current stance diverges from his previous testimony regarding their guardianship.

### Upcoming Hearing and Implications

A hearing addressing Tyler’s motion for summary judgment is scheduled for August 28 in Inglewood, California. Misley and her legal team argue that her case should fall under the California revival statute, making all allegations relevant. They emphasize the impossibility of dividing claims by state, noting that California has a vested interest in addressing sexual misconduct involving minors.

The defense is preparing vigorously for a potential trial in early October. Tyler’s lawyer, Long-Daniels, confirmed his client’s intent to be present at the proceedings, expressing confidence in their case.

### Personal Narrative and Aftermath

In her public statements prior to the lawsuit, Misley spoke about her tumultuous upbringing and the emotional void she felt, which led her into the rock-and-roll lifestyle. Following a traumatic incident in 1975, she eventually left Tyler in 1977 and moved on to a different life, becoming a mother to seven children.

As the case unfolds, what are your thoughts on the implications of such allegations in the context of public interest and justice?